Malaysia gets green light from US to acquire Kuwaiti F/A-18 Hornets
Royal Malaysian Air Force (RMAF) Chief General Tan Sri Asghar Khan Goriman Khan confirmed today that Washington has granted the necessary clearance for the deal, as the US is the original equipment manufacturer of the aircraft.
The long-anticipated deal involves around 30 Hornets – a mix of single-seat F/A-18Cs and twin-seat F/A-18Ds – currently in service with the Kuwait Air Force.
Defence Minister Datuk Seri Mohamed Khaled previously said the aircraft, originally acquired by Kuwait in the 1990s, are generally in good condition.
During his visit to Kuwait last October, Khaled said the Gulf nation expressed no objections to Malaysia's request to procure its Hornet fighter jets.
The procurement, however, is subject to approval from the supplier country, the United States, and could only be done once Kuwait has received all of its new fighter aircraft, the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, as well as the Eurofighter Typhoon.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Barnama
5 hours ago
- Barnama
Brokering The Cambodia-Thailand Ceasefire
What did they say about trust being like a vase, which, once broken, will never be the same again? So, do we leave it in tatters, or try to fix it back to form? This could well describe the state of play between Cambodia and Thailand sharing a border which has long been an unruly frontier, where old maps, national pride and political survival intersect. The trust deficit between the two considerably outweighs the cultivated goodwill, leaving no illusion that whatever peace struck on the anvil of diplomacy will be iron clad. Thus, the brokering of a ceasefire between the two following recent clashes is a reminder that diplomacy's true measure lies not in sweeping settlements, but in holding the line against worse outcomes. On July 28, Cambodia and Thailand agreed to halt hostilities from midnight. Meeting in Putrajaya under Malaysia's chairmanship of ASEAN, both leaders accepted an immediate and unconditional ceasefire. The agreement was the product of painstaking, unglamorous but by no means lacklustre facilitation by Malaysia, with the United States playing a consequential, parallel role. President Trump added urgency by warning that tariff negotiations with both countries would not proceed until 'fighting stops.' That truth was tested in late July, when tensions that began simmering in May erupted as Cambodian and Thai troops exchanged fire in disputed territory along the Dangrek mountains. Thanks to the trust shortfall, what began as a familiar border clash escalated sharply when Cambodia deployed multiple launch rocket systems that hit a hospital, among other targets, prompting Thailand to respond with F‑16 strikes, possibly the first time its air force had fired in anger since a brief border war with Laos in 1987. Tens of thousands fled to makeshift camps. The fighting was the most intense in more than a decade. China, present as an observer, lent additional weight to the talks – particularly important for Cambodia, which counts Beijing as its most dependable backer. The optics mattered: the message was that de‑escalation was in everyone's interest, and that Malaysia's convening role was part of a wider diplomatic effort, not an exercise in rivalry. Reaching the ceasefire was never a foregone conclusion as, not surprisingly, the two sides took diametrically opposed approaches to handling the dispute. Phnom Penh sought to internationalise the issue, reviving old appeals to the International Court of Justice and casting itself as the aggrieved party. Bangkok insisted on tackling it bilaterally, out of the global spotlight and far from anything that might invite international arbitration. Neither could be seen to back down. And unlike the clash in 2011, this confrontation played out against a more tangled political backdrop. The feud between Cambodia's strongman Hun Sen and Thailand's Shinawatra family, once firm friends, added an edge that made compromise all the more politically fraught. Into this maelstrom stepped Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, intent on calming the waters. He engaged both Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet and Thailand's Acting Prime Minister Phumtham with care, giving each space to air grievances while calibrating the optics: enough publicity to signal progress, but never so much as to box either side in. After all, wiggle room in diplomatic negotiations is an absolute necessity. By bringing the two leaders to Putrajaya, within 24 hours, and offering to coordinate observers, Malaysia showed that an ASEAN chair willing to act and quick on the draw can still shape events. Privileged to have a front row seat to witness history unfolding on the fly the night before, seeing Anwar holding conversations with two phones synchronously with earnestness but a full dose of panache stirred Goosebumps, what more that this came the day after the much vaunted and infamous 'Turun Anwar' rally. To be sure, the meeting in Putrajaya was as much about process as substance. The ceasefire was framed as an initial measure to halt the fighting and stabilise the situation, not even as prelude to dispute resolution. Follow‑up arrangements rely largely on bilateral mechanisms between Cambodia and Thailand, with ASEAN in a supporting role. That was by design. A heavier ASEAN role might have triggered resentment and made the arrangement harder to sustain. But this doesn't preclude Anwar, in his personal capacity, from doing the nudging and cajoling to both parties, more as ASEAN family members than as chair sitting in council. On the formal side, the arrangement represented a midpoint between Bangkok's preference for bilateralism and Phnom Penh's push for wider international involvement. This approach rests on the will and discipline of the two parties where the animus between them makes implementation inherently fraught. The acting Thai prime minister's commitment carries political weight, but sustaining the ceasefire will depend in part on civil–military relations in Bangkok, where the armed forces have long exercised considerable autonomy. On the Cambodian side, Prime Minister Hun Manet faces his own constraints. Barely two years into his premiership, he cannot afford to appear weak on a matter of national pride, his political lineage notwithstanding. Domestic sentiment demands that Cambodia stand firm, leaving little room for compromise, even in the interest of stability. All said, while the crucial role of political leaders is undeniable, a lasting pause will require more than cabinet orders. It will need continued discipline from commanders of both sides on the ground. Anwar stressed that point to members of the ASEAN diplomatic corps during an interface session in Jakarta yesterday, on the sidelines of his state visit to Indonesia. That political reality shapes expectations of what this agreement can achieve. In the aftermath, some commentary focused on the obvious: that it did nothing to resolve the underlying dispute. But that was never the objective. Complaints that ASEAN failed to resolve the dispute swiftly miss the point entirely. There was never any prospect of conjuring fantasy settlements overnight, a standard at which no international body performs any better. The endless navel‑gazing over ASEAN's shortcomings isn't analysis; it's an academic distraction from the work that still lies ahead. For Malaysia, this is not a pursuit in vainglory. The role of ASEAN chair is designed to be facilitative, not proprietorial. The ability to plant the seeds with the prospect of future harvest for peace is reward enough. As in life, so in geopolitics, there are no absolute guarantees. ASEAN works best when the chair is willing to act, not by trying to foist solutions, but by creating the space and opportunity in which they might one day emerge. -- BERNAMA (The views expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not reflect the official policy or position of BERNAMA) BERNAMA provides up-to-date authentic and comprehensive news and information which are disseminated via BERNAMA Wires; BERNAMA TV on Astro 502, unifi TV 631 and MYTV 121 channels and BERNAMA Radio on FM93.9 (Klang Valley), FM107.5 (Johor Bahru), FM107.9 (Kota Kinabalu) and FM100.9 (Kuching) frequencies. Follow us on social media : Facebook : @bernamaofficial, @bernamatv, @bernamaradio Twitter : @ @BernamaTV, @bernamaradio Instagram : @bernamaofficial, @bernamatvofficial, @bernamaradioofficial TikTok : @bernamaofficial
Malay Mail
11 hours ago
- Malay Mail
Come hell or high water: Cambodia must make peace in an asymmetrical war with Thailand — Phar Kim Beng
JULY 30 — The Thai-Cambodian border conflict of July 2025, which escalated into a full-scale military confrontation and displaced more than 300,000 people, may have been halted temporarily by a midnight ceasefire agreement. Yet, beneath the apparent calm lies an asymmetrical truth: Thailand, with overwhelming military superiority, can afford to wage a war of attrition. Cambodia cannot. Thus, for Phnom Penh, peace is not merely a diplomatic choice — it is a geopolitical necessity. The ceasefire, brokered at a moment of intense regional and global scrutiny, was welcomed across Asean. Its immediate enforcement on July 28 was a diplomatic feat, especially given the speed at which it was organised. The top brass of both nations' armed forces met within 24 hours at a forward post in Surin Province, Thailand, reaffirming their intention to hold the line. The two sides agreed to halt troop movements, avoid provocations, and establish four-member liaison teams for future coordination. Importantly, both defence ministries backed the plan. Thailand, having called out Cambodia for ceasefire violations earlier in the week, softened its tone after the military-to-military interface. Cambodia, for its part, categorically denied any breaches, claiming it had respected the ceasefire from the very beginning. Yet, no amount of face-saving declarations or tightly scripted meetings can hide the lopsided military equation. Thailand's military, with its F-16 fighters, advanced armoured divisions, and formidable naval power, dwarfs Cambodia's capabilities in every conceivable category. Royal Thai Army soldiers are transported on the back of an army truck in the Thai border province of Si Sa Ket July 26, 2025. — AFP pic Cambodia's only tactical advantage in recent years has been its acquisition of long-range rocket artillery, but even this cannot offset Thailand's dominance in the air, on the ground, and in its command-and-control structures. Any further escalation would expose Cambodia's vulnerabilities in the field, in logistics, and in sustaining a prolonged campaign. Given this reality, Cambodia's best chance at asserting its interests lies not on the battlefield but in the courtroom and the diplomatic chamber. As early as June, Cambodia sought adjudication from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to resolve the long-running territorial dispute. This was a calculated decision — one that aligns with Phnom Penh's historical preference for multilateral arbitration and reflects an understanding of its limitations. Thailand, however, has repeatedly rejected third-party mediation, insisting instead on bilateral talks. This mirrors Bangkok's longstanding aversion to international legal interventions that may lock it into outcomes contrary to its national narrative and perceived territorial integrity. It is precisely here that Cambodia must walk the tightrope. While invoking international law and seeking external legitimacy, it must also engage Thailand on bilateral terms to ensure that diplomacy remains alive. The ceasefire agreement — while commendable — exists in a fragile ecosystem. It is held together by Asean diplomatic activism, threats of high tariffs from the United States, and the blunt warning that trade talks could be stalled completely by President Donald Trump if fighting resumed. For a Cambodian economy grappling with post-pandemic recovery and attempting to wean itself off illicit digital revenues along the border, this external pressure was both timely and decisive. Likewise, Thailand, eager to secure its own economic gains and maintain regional legitimacy as a future Asean Chair, could not afford to appear belligerent in the eyes of Washington, Beijing, or the broader Asia Pacific. Nevertheless, Cambodia's decision to comply with the ceasefire must not be mistaken for surrender. Rather, it should be interpreted as a pivot—toward law, diplomacy, and international solidarity. Hun Manet's government, still under the long shadow of his father Hun Sen, must now articulate a coherent peace strategy that goes beyond ceasefires. That includes pushing for the August 4 General Border Committee meeting to deliver tangible results: demilitarised buffer zones, joint border demarcation teams, and confidence-building mechanisms supervised by Asean monitors, if not neutral third parties. Yet spoilers remain. Wars — especially border wars — attract those who thrive in chaos. There are factions within both militaries who believe victory is the only deterrent, and within civilian power circles who seek to elevate their political stature through brinkmanship. Sun Tzu once wrote that the best victory is one not fought. But Clausewitz warned that war is politics by other means. Cambodia cannot afford to indulge in the latter interpretation. In an asymmetrical confrontation, the stronger party always sets the pace, and the weaker party must navigate with greater wisdom. Cambodia has that wisdom — if it can remain disciplined. It must elevate its diplomatic efforts, consolidate its case at the ICJ, and secure support from Asean's current and future Chairs. Malaysia and the Philippines have already endorsed a peaceful resolution. Now is the moment for Phnom Penh to push for Asean centrality — not in name, but in deeds. This conflict has already cost too much. Border towns on both sides have been shelled. Livelihoods have been destroyed. Trust has eroded. Every new skirmish risks drawing in larger powers, further complicating an already combustible region. China and the United States are watching, not just to prevent war but to test the resilience of Asean as a rules-based regional order. Come hell or high water, Cambodia must make peace. Not because it is weak — but because peace, in this asymmetrical war, is its strongest form of power. * Phar Kim Beng is a professor of Asean Studies at the International Islamic University Malaysia. ** This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
Borneo Post
a day ago
- Borneo Post
RMN showcases firepower and readiness in maritime exercise
A missile fired from a RMN ship during the Taming Sari Series 23/25 exercise in the South China Sea. KOTA KINABALU (July 29): The Royal Malaysian Navy (RMN) demonstrated its operational strength and capabilities in defending the nation's maritime interests during the large-scale Taming Sari Series 23/25 exercise in the South China Sea on Tuesday. Defence Minister Datuk Seri Mohamed Khaled Nordin, who witnessed the event, said the exercise served as a vital platform to evaluate the readiness and competence of RMN assets and personnel in handling conventional maritime threats. 'This exercise is not merely a military routine, but a crucial requirement to ensure our personnel are not only well-equipped with assets but are also capable of defending the country at all times,' he told a press conference after observing missile and torpedo firings at Kota Kinabalu Terminal 2. Among the highlights of the exercise were the successful launches of Exocet missiles from KD Lekiu and KD Lekir, as well as an Exocet SM39 missile from the submarine KD Tunku Abdul Rahman. The RMN's second submarine, KD Tun Razak, carried out a live torpedo launch in a real war configuration. According to Mohamed Khaled, the missile firings were conducted from distances exceeding 30 kilometers, while torpedo launches were within 10 kilometers — effectively testing the tactical and technical capabilities of RMN's primary naval assets. In addition to these vessels, RMN deployed several other ships including KD Seri Indera Sakti, KD Kelantan, KD Selangor, KD Badik and KD Terengganu. The exercise also assessed the current condition of RMN assets — ranging from older ships to new vessels under construction. 'We need to evaluate the effectiveness and operational readiness of these assets regularly,' Mohamed Khaled said. In total, 17 RMN ships, two submarines, two aircraft and three helicopters participated, involving over 1,400 officers and personnel. 'This exercise also reinforces our defense doctrine, which is defensive in nature and aimed at safeguarding the nation, the region, and maritime interests,' he added. Mohamed Khaled noted that RMN is undergoing asset modernization through the 15-to-5 transformation plan, which will streamline the fleet into five main ship classes to enhance operational and maintenance efficiency. He emphasized that such exercises must be conducted consistently, as they involve not only technological strength but also the physical and mental endurance of both experienced and new personnel. 'This isn't a new initiative — it has been conducted for a long time — but what makes this year's edition special is the integrated use of all three systems: surface, subsurface, and air,' he said. 'Missile and torpedo firings require meticulous planning and management, as each round is a high-value asset and cannot be used carelessly.' Also present were Defence Ministry Secretary-General Datuk Lokman Hakim Ali, Navy Commander Admiral Tan Sri (Dr) Zulhelmy Ithnain, Malaysian Armed Forces Chief of Staff Lieutenant General Datuk Azhan Md Othman, and senior RMN officers.
